International child abduction and the best interests of the child: an analysis of judicial reasoning in two jurisdictions

C.R. Mol, Thalia Kruger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The Hague Child Abduction Convention aims to secure the speedy return of abducted children. Judges can use a limited number of grounds for refusal. They may not make an in-depth assessment of the merits of any custody issue. The Convention on the Rights of the Child provides that the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children. This article analyses the use that judges make in their decisions on the concept of “the best interests of the child”. For this purpose it scrutinizes the case law on international child abduction of the Netherlands and England and Wales. By using software designed for qualitative research, the authors are able to make an objective and systematic analysis. This article confirms the hypothesis that the concept of the best interests of the child is often used without substance, and sometimes only to endorse conclusions that would have possibly been reached in any event.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)421-454
JournalJournal of Private International Law
Volume14
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Keywords

  • international child abduction
  • wrongful removal
  • wrongful retention
  • best interests of the child
  • the Netherlands
  • England and Wales
  • Hague Child Abduction Convention
  • Brussels IIa (Regulation 2201/2003)
  • return orders
  • second chance procedure

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'International child abduction and the best interests of the child: an analysis of judicial reasoning in two jurisdictions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this